RalphiusMaximus

I note a lot of people referring to Liam in the past tense. How about waiting for some real news before consigning him to oblivion?

No Morton. He was meant to be out for 2 wasn't he?

OK, finally got to watch the game. In general I agree with most of what people have already said. I don't think Watts was quite as diabolical as many people make out, but he was still unimpressive. He seems to be trying too much to do the team things when he really needs to be selfish and demand the ball for himself. He also gets absolutely aweful delivery from the midfield which isn't going to help. All in all I think he needs to get a good solid 20+ disposals next week to justify round one, but he's not as far off as people make out.

Just a random thought from left field. Could Watts have been tasked with taking the fullback out of the play to allow the medium forwards to work? Carey on MMM was talking about how he would lead up to the wing and then just hang there rather than pushing to the contest. I saw in the highlights package at least one occasion when he ran his man out of the pack rather than try to mark the ball. It'd be an intereting form of foxing.

Very big night for the club. I was listening on MMM and they were surprisingly even in tehir call. If anything, they gave us more discussion time that the pies. When one of them pulled the line about Collingwood having players out, he was quickly overridden by another pointing out how many we had out too. Wayne Carey kept saying that it looked like we'd drop the intensity and get rolled over. Was surprised that it didn't happen. Once again, I'll have to wait until I can download the game to give a realistic opinion. However, it sounds like our youngsters and rookies really impressed. I heard Davis mentioned in play a lot, although he was never singled out by the callers. It sounded to me like we were far less restricted than last week in terms of the gameplan. Am I right in thinking htat we played a more free-flowing attack when we had the ball to complement the zoning and conservative play when defending or under pressure?

Also, looking forward to seeing Davis get a run tonight. He looks like he can stand up for himself.

I second this. I was listening on the radio and it sounded really bad. The SEN commentators must be completely ignorant of trends in modern football if you go by their work on our games. When I DLed the games and watched them it suddenly became very clear that we were playing for very specific goals that had nothing to do with the scoreboard (almost as if we were having a practise match). I think it's a damning indicment of the SEN crew that they couldn't. or wouldn't see this and let their listeners know that it was going on.

Any Melbourne-listed players there?

So we can now include Grimes in the list to be left out...

I can see four wins here. I really hope that we step up a little more than I expect and pinch a couple more, but on what I've seen so far I give us Brisbane, Richmond, Bullogs and Essendon. I'd like to say we can take the swans, but I think they'll just be hitting their stride by then. The Saints aren't going to slide anywhere near as much as people are saying, so I can't see us toppling them. I think there are a couple of smokies in there. While I don't like us against the Swans, we might knock them over. Carlton could turn into something of a grudge match if we play up the"bruise-free" angle, but ti think they have too much quality on the park for us atm. Obviously things can change in a heartbeat if key players go down in any of these sides, so it's all speculative right now.

Plus there is the clothsline tackle on Harbrow last night. If he does more of those I will be a happy man.

Agreed. He will be a monster at stoppages this year. Great pick up for the recruiting team.

Does anyone remember how long Morton is out for this time? If he's over his fall he'd be likely to be in the squad. That would put the squeeze on yet another player. I'm inclined to agree with a lot of the names above, but I would add Garland as well. He hurt himself this week and could be rested as a precaution.

OK, so we win our next 28 or so matches and we're set, right?

I concede the point. In my defence I was listening to the SEN coverage and they made us sound VERY bad. As you can see above, my opinion has changed somewhat having actually seen the game.

I love the Gys. I think he's a geniune ball magnet and with his height he'll be a huge weapon in the midfield sooner or later. I just think that Neeld will have a big focus on physical play and JG looked like he was still a long way off being able to stand his ground in that department. As I said, he may improve with some games under his belt and win a spot in the side, but I have a feeling that he needs to put on a bit more muscle to be in serious contention.

I loved the aggression last night. It was so much better than last year. Magner will be the first rookie promoted given Neeld's love of grunt players and his successful start in these games. I think the Gys might struggle to find a spot in the side based on the little game time he had, but given how long it's been since he had a real hitout he could surprise me with some more games under his belt. If we inject Magner into the centre square with Molonel and either Bate or Jones, nobody will be calling it buise free anymore.

LOL. I've played one match of Aussie Rules in my life. I'm a soccer player.

So we win our next two matches and we're set right?

Well, I finally got a chance to watch the games, and all in all I'm less worried than I was last night. I think things were significantly better than the radio coverage made them out to be. Game one we were killed by small things that stopped us from nailing regulation scoring opportunities. The chemistry between Watts and Clark isn't quite there, a few players missed shots they would normally have nailed and the out of bounds rule hit us pretty hard. While we probably should have won anyway, I think it's pretty clear that we outplayed them for most of the match but didn't put them away on the scoreboard. Game two looked to me like the players were under far more rigid instructions. The first half they were told that they would only play plan A, regardless of the situation. It seems pretty clear that they were ignoring options they were taking in the first game and following the plan of push down the line and force a stoppage. This is basically what Sydney did in their premiership year, and while it is a failure in the NAB cup due to the aforementioned out of bounds rule, it is a way to win ugly. The second half they were given a slight change of playing primarily plan A with the option of using plans B or C if they had the time and opportunity. This is where we saw the gameplan actually work. We suddenly had the option of the fast switch if there were no choices down the line, and also made use of the quick handball to a runner as a way to get the ball quickly into the forward line. Both of these plays worked well and aided us in scoring. To me it looked a lot like Neeld was teaching our players a bit of a lesson. They played a half using only a single set play and held the opposition to seven points, then played another half using only three set plays and won. Whether this was always the plan for the second match or it was a reaction to the loss in the first I will probably never know, but that is how I see it. I also think that the radio coverage was unduly harsh on certain players. Watts, despite his low numbers, was actually not bad. He put a lot of tackling pressure on and presented well in the forward line. He could easily have had a couple of goals in game one had Clark not charged in and spoiled him. Bennell I still say can't be trusted in the backline, but in the middle or forward he is a viable option and did some good things. I also see why people raved about Tynan. He's a bit like the Waterboy. He sees the ball and gets the ball. Overall, nowhere near as bad as I expected. There were signs there that we have a side that will be able to win ugly if it needs to and possibly win pretty when it has the opportunity. We now have some serious beast in the middle as well, which is always a good thing.

Hey, have a look at This Article. In the picture, isn't that a free kick to Jamar? You'd think they wouldn't want to put something like that on their website.

The SEN folks were wondering about that too. I'd love to hear it addressed by someone official. Are they doing the "explain away bad calls" segment again this year?

And now for the million dollar question... Were we playing for real or did Neeld use this as an extra practice match and have them running specific styles/drills/plans for the different halves? I ask this because there was such a marked shift in the style of play in the last half aagainst Brisbane. It sounded like they freed up the running players and attacked far more. Did anyone notice if there were obvious changes in theme from half to half (to half to half)? I wonder what MN has in store for us next week?

Funny thing. This is my wishlist from the five things thread; I got 4 of those. I think I should be pretty happy all things considered. I don't know if Lawrence played at all tonight, but Blease didn't so the crumbing forward one is still a bit open ended.

OK, so having listened to the SEN coverage, I can draw the following conclusions from tonight: Sellar is worth what we paid and will be a useful addition to the team. Magner is a machine and aill probably play most games this season. Bate is going to be much better this year and looks like being our new midfield workhorse. Clark presents well but may need to work on his kicking. We need to be willing to use the corridor when we have the advantage rather than squandering said advantage by continuing to work the boundary. Our mids need to spot up leading forwards rather than bombing to the hot spot every time. Our forwards need to create space and lead so the mids can spot them up rather than bombing to the hot spot every time. Bennell can't be trusted in the backline. Grimes is going to be fine once he gets his confidence back. If Watts contines to play like this he's going to be traded. Have I missed anything?